Comment by consumer451
14 days ago
We seem to agree on where we are at in the USA, so I am not trying to argue at all, but just to clarify what I meant here:
> You don't really need to have the onsite waste storage built before the reactor goes online.
But one would have to construct a safe and secure on-site storage facility ahead of time, is what I imagined. It's not like that's something you would add as an afterthought, is it?
You have to plan for it, but you're not going to have any waste until the first refueling, which is ~ 18-24 months after you start operations. (unless SMR have a drastically different fuel cycle than the big ones, I honestly don't know)
Ha, while discussing this with you, S3 just released their video with Radiant, an SMR startup.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40711474
The only thing that I've seen on the topic is this:
> Results reveal that water-, molten salt–, and sodium-cooled SMR designs will increase the volume of nuclear waste in need of management and disposal by factors of 2 to 30.
> ... In addition, SMR spent fuel will contain relatively high concentrations of fissile nuclides, which will demand novel approaches to evaluating criticality during storage and disposal.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2111833119